Re: [PATCH 2/3] completion: remove old code
- From
Frans Klaver <fransklaver@gmail.com>
- Date
- Jan 30, 2012, 11:19 UTC
- Message-ID
- <CAH6sp9Of2rT4ESMYj9kC2NPtapsN58X3A0FpHTTZO-kSqpb-2Q@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <CAMP44s2j+qotu8Fb-1qq9bqHqt+ZF877YzZFXHiMo7Z_BGzTMA@mail.gmail.com>
Hi,
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 11:51 AM, Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> wrote:
Show 10 quoted lines
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 6:27 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote: >> Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> writes: >> >>> OK, maybe some people use it, but most likely they are using an old >>> version of git, and thus an old version of the completion script. >> >> Please adjust your attitude about backward compatibility to match the >> standard used for other parts of Git. > > What attitude?
This attitude:
Show 14 quoted lines
> I am simply stating a fact. How much percentage of > people do you think still have .git/remotes around? How many people do > you think have clones more than 3 years old? And how many of these > people would complain if remotes were not properly completed for these > repos? > > I doubt anybody would have complained, but I guess we would never > know, because I already proposed a solution that would work for them > and only uses a *single* line of code, unlike the current 40 ones. > > I don't see what is the problem with the attitude of sending a patch > to remove code that most likely nobody cares about (neither you or I > have numbers on this), and then finding an alternative when people do > care about it.
I don't think Junio actually meant an "attitude", but just your angle of approach (== attitude) on backwards compatibility.
Maybe numbers for this could be generated from the next git user survey. If numbers justify this change, maybe this or something like it could be scheduled for a major release of git.
Cheers, Frans